Focusing on Cultural Variances of Dog Ownership in Los Angeles and Community Identity.

Animals can be classified as wild or tame and as sacred or profane, as in the Durkheimian sense. Where do American urban dwellers of today place dogs in this matrix and how does it determine their identity in urban communities? Changing cultural value-systems play a significant part in community identity, decision-making and policing regarding the use of public space, urban amenities and concomitant resource allocations. Cities need to take account of these cultural value-systems - in addition to socio-economic status or race and ethnicity factors - in order to minimize organizational ineffectiveness, inefficiencies, and unnecessary urban conflict, in addition to best serve the needs of animals and communities. First, this paper seeks to determine the modern human-animal boundary when for the first time in the history of mankind more than 50% of the world's population resides in urban, rather than rural, environments. In the United States, more than 80% of the population was comprised of urban dwellers in 2005. This switch from rural to urban living recasts the location of animal actors in human society. Second, this paper clarifies cultural differences between the dog-ownership practices of select social classes and ethnic groups in urban environments. Finally it begins to identify weaknesses in the city response to these cultural differences that negatively impact the well being of dogs and caregivers in urban communities. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]